538 has Clinton at 80% to win

On the electoral college they project Clinton 354 and Trump 183. In the swing states they have Clinton winning Arizona, North Carolina, Colorado, Ohio, Iowa and Florida. Trump to win Missouri, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Kansas, Indiana, Texas and Utah.

The 183 projected for Trump (and it is only a projection) would be the worst result for the Republicans since 1996 when they got 159.

DifferentPerspective

Deeply Dishonest

So, Bill Clinton innocently schedules time out from supporting his wife’s fight to be become President and innocently happens to be in the same town as the Attorney-General who should be prosecuting his wife shortly. He then innocently bumps into her. They innocently talk about the grandkids. All completely innocent right?

Anyone who believes this should give me a call – I have a bridge I can sell you – call O800- BULLSHIT.

I suspect that David wants to get a debate going to cover while he is in Christchurch today and tomorrow at the Nationals Party Annual conference (a real conference, not the L , P and G Party charades) so he is not telling the whole story.

A SAMPLE.,…An 80 Percent Shot Doesn’t Mean Clinton Is A Sure Thing
“: …. A FiveThirtyEight Chat
In this week’s politics chat, we discuss FiveThirtyEight’s general election forecast for 2016, which launched Wednesday and will be updated through Election Day. The transcript below has been lightly edited.
________________________________________
David (Firestone, managing editor): After a lot of work, our general election forecast has gone live! But not everyone fully understands what a forecast model is. Some people think it’s a poll or are incorrectly saying, “Nate calls the race for Clinton.” Can we start by explaining at a basic level what a forecast model tells us?
Clare (Malone, senior political writer): Say it very, very slowly and use small words, please.
Nate (Silver, editor in chief): Pro buh bil it eez.
Harry (Enten, senior political writer): Looks like some artisanal tea that I’d buy in hipster Brooklyn.
Nate: Not everything 0 percent or 100 percent! Some things in between! Cookie Monster like numbers in between!
Harry: I believe Cookie Monster now eats vegetables.
David: And that in-between number gives Hillary Clinton about an 80 percent chance of winning, which obviously doesn’t mean it’s over.
Clare: Did Cookie vote Trump? Or is he a Bernie Bro?
Nate: I’m sort of annoyed by it being 80 percent, because I feel like that’s the number people most misinterpret. When you say 80 percent, people take that to mean “really, really certain.” It’s not, particularly.
David: I liked your ballgame analogy, Nate, in the article you wrote to accompany the forecast. Teams come back from 20-percent-win situations frequently. In fact, about 20 percent of the time!
Nate: Absolutely amazing how that works!
Clare: You’re annoyed that it’s a high number because people are going to glom onto that and think it holds for the whole election? Not realizing that this is where things stand as of June 29 and that it’ll change as things go on and polls come in?
Nate: It can change, sure. But let’s be clear — 80 percent is the forecast Clinton has to win on Nov. 8. That’s our best estimate of her chances, accounting for the uncertainty between now and then, based on the historical accuracy of presidential polling. If the election were held today instead, she’d be a safer bet still.
The polls can change a lot between now and Nov. 8. And they probably will. But there’s a chance those changes benefit Clinton, and not Donald Trump. And since she’s up by about 7 points now, there’s the chance they help Trump … but not enough to allow him to win.
And that’s the thing. Of the 80 percent of the time Clinton wins — PLENTY of those times are going to involve her sweating. Either because Trump makes it very close at the end or because there are some periods in which things look very tight along the way, as they did for Obama against McCain and against Romney.
But Clinton will win a lot of those close calls, along with her share of landslides. “…………….

Milhous

Most right wingers I know are furious with the weapons grade morons who have put Trump as the nominee, when a trained monkey would have beaten Clinton. Polling shows that even Kasich now ( despite being out of the media) leads Clinton. The Don is a big fat Loser who will lose bigly. Clintons college margin will be yuuuuugggggeeee!

Hajji

cmm

As posted in the Brexit thread, polls are often wrong – generally predicting a more leftie outcome than what happens. This is a growing trend.

Now why might that be?

My personal theory is that it comes down to two things:

1) People who are not voting left are sick of being bludgeoned by leftie vitriol in the media and everywhere else. They become the “silent majority”.

They will say they are undecided or maybe even say they will vote left, but when it comes to actually placing an X they do the opposite.

2) Lefties are heavily invested in virtue signaling. They will spend hours ranting on Facebook and the media etc. They will attend rallies. They will throw stuff at Trump supporters. But when it comes to actually going to the polling booth and making an X… well that’s boring and nobody will know … so less people actually do this.

Lefties feel that they’ve done their bit by virtue signaling. They don’t feel the need to actually follow through with action.

Scott

Well just saw the latest Rasmussen poll that has Trump ahead 43 to 39. So the polls are all over the place.
But Trump is getting more disciplined, staying on message and concentrating on three things, immigration, trade and national defence. He is strong on all of those things.

Hillary is weak on those things and will basically continue the Obama approach of open borders, bad trade deals and allowing Isis to do as it pleases.

Hillary will add one thing to the presidency, she is the most corrupt person to ever run for president. Her husband accidentally meets with the Attorney general in a secret meeting while Hillary is under FBI investigation? Move on, nothing to see here – puhleese!

Manolo

mikenmild

Bit of a sweeping statement there, Scoot. Just from memory, I believe the record shows Ronald Reagan led the most corrupt administration ever, with over 100 senior officials investigated, prosecuted or resigned. Going back further, the Harding and Grant administrations were famous for their rampant corruption. Oh, and Nixon, musn’t forget him…

aitkenmike

Is there any indication of a contagion effect in this context? What is Trump’s nomination doing to concurrent perceptions of the Republicans? Is there any sign that some Republicans are distancing themselves from Trump’s monkeyshines in order to salvage their own electoral wellbeing? If so, how effective is this proving? What about Trump camp/kitsch follower faction Republicans?

Scott

Mikey still the biggest source of disinformation on this blog. Reagan the most corrupt president? What nonsense, even the dopy liberals reckon they admire Reagan. I reckon you just make things up.
Mikey I want you to answer me honestly. Are you trolling again Mikey?

Scott

No one ever attaches Reagan and scandal – just ridiculous. But if you want to think scandal think Clinton. Bill was impeached, Hillary is under FBI criminal investigation and now Bill just happens to run into the Attorney general on a private plane? Surely a total coincidence?

And that’s without mentioning the $150 million the Clinton’s have received in speaking fees since Bill left office and Hillary has been secretary of state. Those must have been great speeches!?

cmm

Now that is surely not a corrupt administration, that is an administration that is clearing out some trash.

Even with Nixon after watergate resigned resigned after his own people told him to.

What is far more problematic is the Obama/Clinton reign where very few senior officials are being investigated, prosecuted or resigning.

Clintons and Obama? They don’t resign. They obstruct investigations. They lie and nobody holds their feet to the fire – least of all themselves.

No wonder there are so few investigations and resignations. People just have to threaten to spill the beans and the investigation dries up.

Trump has a HUGE pile of ammo to throw at Clinton. He’s waiting for the right time to deploy it.

There is no way that Clinton can survive the email scandal because:
1) It clearly shows she ordered people to delete the confidential banners from confidential docs.
2) She handled confidential docs badly. Now people want to give her more power and more oversight over even more confidential docs?? Really?
3) Even if the docs were not marked confidential at the time (one of the lame excuses), then the only other option is to admit that she does not have the nous to figure out confidential information herself and how to act with prudence. Again, giving her even more oversight is really daft.
4) Having her Saudi Arabian raised aide Huma Abedin handle emails for her. Security is a bit slack.

Then one just has to run out a few of the blatant lies and mock her with the Bosnian Sniper fire stuff.

cha

JamesP

I remember taking 5/1 odds on Trump becoming the Republican nominee late last year and thinking it was a bargain.
Yes, Trump is a weak candidate but so is Hillary. Remember her resounding victories against Obama and Sanders? Me neither.
Is the chance of one of her many other scandals blowing up in her face really only 20%?

“I am hoping you might start delivering some balanced blogging for all of your readers and contributors.”

While I support Trump myself, and would be happy to see more from DPF on Hillary, this is DPF’s personal blog, not a news service. He is under no obligation to be balanced, and can be as onesided or biased as he likes, just as I certainly would be if it were my blog.